Crescent Peak wind project was a poorly conceived idea

In a Dec. 5 editorial, the Review-Journal was flat wrong to broadly characterize environmental groups as opposed to “any and all energy development and economic growth.” The Wilderness Society and partner organizations have demonstrated a strong track record of working with project developers, state and federal agencies and stakeholders to support responsible renewable energy development.

Alex Daue Denver, Colo. The writer is assistant director for energy and climate at The Wilderness Society.

December 15, 2018 - 9:00 pm

In a Dec. 5 editorial, the Review-Journal was flat wrong to broadly characterize environmental groups as opposed to “any and all energy development and economic growth.” The Wilderness Society and partner organizations have demonstrated a strong track record of working with project developers, state and federal agencies and stakeholders to support responsible renewable energy development.

Not every renewable energy project is green. As the Review-Journal editorial acknowledged, the proposed site for the Crescent Peak wind project contains sensitive resources that are incompatible with energy development. It is part of the largest Joshua Tree forest in the world and includes unprotected wilderness-quality lands, important golden eagle habitat and sensitive cultural resources. For these and other reasons, local community members, Native American tribes, sportsmen, environmental groups and others are working to ensure this area is protected. The BLM made the right decision in rejecting Crescent Peak wind.

If Nevada is to meet its ambitious renewable energy goals, the BLM and state leaders must continue to take a smart approach — facilitating development in lower-conflict areas and protecting the most sensitive wildlands and habitat.